Comparing Plato, The Master, Mark Twain, Royal Passengers, And Mariners

According to Socrates’ purpose, he sought out the wisest of people, taught the principle of virtue, and shared his divine beliefs; which had ultimately caused him to create some enemies. Through elenchus and refutation, Socrates’ proved that the wisest of people really weren’t that wise, and this examination was a highly attended event by wealthy young adults.

Alistair MacLeod’s “The Boat” is a literary success on many levels. His ability to evoke mood, sustain a meaningful theme and a strong setting make this piece particularly impressive.

Socrates was a former infantryman, having fought in three campaigns during the war with Sparta, so it is no surprise that he believed justice should not be invoked by the citizens’ pleading. He

The Captain of the ship struggles to maintain his ideal masculine self, but is seen as a weaker and an effeminate character in the eyes of his crew. He is seen as a stranger to the ship but most importantly to himself. “All these people had been together for eighteen months or so, and my position was that of the only stranger on board… I was somewhat of a stranger to myself...but I wondered how for I should turn out faithful to that ideal conception of one’s own personality”(21,Conrad). Early on we see that the captain lacks his masculinity and is not seen powerful and is insecure about his true self- his effeminate character. The captain wants to be like any other captain strong and manly, but struggles to be his ideal self, the great and powerful captain that every ship has, a captain that holds power in the eyes of his crew man. Other ways we see this was when the captain himself was commanded to close the porthole of the ship. “Close your port sir, they are washing

Socrates uses the crafts of a doctor and a sailor to change Thrasymachus’ perception of political rulers. Prior to Socrates manipulation, Thrasymachus views politicians as self-interested rulers who work only for themselves. Socrates compares a sailor captain to a politician. A captain of a ship is not only a captain because he selfishly chose to man a ship, but rather because his sailors respect his for his craft. A good

In both the Apology and Crito, Plato presents Socrates as a staunch defender of law, particularly in the sense that respect for the legal order of one’s polity is a basic obligation of citizenship. The most important reasons Socrates provides for his position in defense of Athenian law are the fear of his accusers, and the nature of his wisdom. He enlightens the Athenians by telling them that his behavior branches from a prophecy by the oracle at Delphi, which claimed that he was the wisest of all men. Identifying his ignorance in most experienced affairs, Socrates resolved that he must be wiser than other men only in that he knows that he knows nothing. To spread this wisdom, he made it his obligation to question other supposed "wise" men to expose them of their false wisdom as ignorance.

In the parable of the ship, the "true pilot," ideally would be the true philosopher. An individual who has immense knowledge of a thing (in this instance that thing is seafaring). The "crew" here are possibly imitation philosophers, or more appropriately, "philodoxers," defined as "[those who] love and gaze at beautiful sounds and colours and so on, and will not tolerate the idea of the beautiful itself as something which is" (p. 328). The "true pilot" ideally has the ability to not only tolerate, but love and appreciate the idea of the sea and the art of seafaring in and of itself. Socrates elaborates this, "the real lover of learning must reach after all truth with all his might from youth upwards" (p. 330). Moreover, in the city as ship parable, the true pilot “must devote his attention to year and seasons, sky and stars and winds, and all that belongs to his art, if he is to be anything like a ruler of the ship” (p. 334). Yet, the “crew,” in this parable the metaphorical citizens, runs the risk of viewing the “true pilot” as “stargazer, bibble-babbler, good-for-nothing” because he is so devoted to one thing and is all consumed by it (p. 334).

A third goal of Socrates’ education policy is to create fair and just rulers, who extend themselves solely for the good of the city and not for personal gain. Socrates is convinced that because philosophers are the only people who do not wish to rule (they have better things to do with their time), they

Socrates’ second argument is an attempt to show that Callicles admiration of courageous men is inconsistent with the view that all pleasures are good regardless of their source or the character of those who experience them. Socrates provides the example of cowards in war, who are pained by the advance of the enemy and rejoice upon their retreat by at least as much as the courageous (498a5-ca). Therefore if pleasure is good then the coward who is happy by the enemy’s retreat is as good as the courageous, something which Callicles doesn’t want to portray as he believes the cowardly and foolish are bad. In the end Callicles is forced to admit a distinction between good and bad pleasures and this distinction in turn allows Socrates to condemn contemporary Athenian politicians for ministering to the pleasures rather than the welfare of their people. From that point on Callicles so disgusted by the outcome only replies to Socrates in a formal manner thereby allowing Socrates to engage in a lengthy monologue in which the choice between philosophy and a public life is examined in the light of conclusions already established.9 Socrates argues that contemporary statesman are like poets pandering to the pleasures of the masses however Callicles thinks this only sensible for the ‘”leviathan” will kill you if you don’t humour it.’10 Callicles may well have been right in asserting that Socrates would be at the mercy of anyone who chooses to kill or injure him however immunity from

Socrates declares that there is no one to teach people about wisdom and virtues. His conversation with Callias explains that no one can teach wisdom and virtue as there is no one that has mastered wisdom and virtue. Human beings are fallible creatures, morality, ethics and virtues are not always primarily considered in the multitude of decisions and actions that are performed every day. Humans are imperfect individuals, bound by no definitive moral code that is enforceable under any circumstance. Humans are creatures of free will and with free will comes evil and righteousness simultaneously. No one can teach a human being to always be righteous, kind, caring and generous. Socrates declares that there is no one capable of teaching all of these virtues because humans are all imperfect individuals but through inner evaluation humans can constantly strive to get closer to perfection.

In these, he tested to see how wise so-called wise men were and each and every time he claimed that these men were not wise at all. Socrates went and tested all sorts of men from poets, politicians, and artisans. He claimed that all were inferior to him because they claimed to know much when they knew not much at all. And that, although he did not know all the tings these men knew, he was still wiser. He went so far as to tell these men what he thought, and even stated all these feelings in the court. This, no doubt, led to his general hatred more than any other act. But I wonder, had anyone ever questioned Socrates? And on what basis did he judge wisdom? Socrates claimed that a man who thought themselves the wisest were the least, but that is exactly what he was, a man who thought himself the wisest. Maybe he was the type of person to dislike any man who’s intellect challenged his own. “Is there not here conceit of knowledge, which is a disgraceful sort of ignorance? And this is the point in which, as I think, I am superior to men in general.”

Further, Socrates finds out in his investigation in the service of god that people with higher reputation tend to be more deficient, and people with lower reputation tend to be more knowledgeable. Therefore, Socrates thinks his mission is to teach people to understand an important idea: human wisdom worth little or nothing, and it is critical for us to be aware of and accept our limit and ignorance. Although Socrates knows that carrying out his mission would bring people’s hatred and even endanger his own life, Socrates thinks “I must attach the greatest importance to the god’s oracle, so I must go to all those who had any reputation or knowledge to examine its meaning”. (Apology, 21e) As Socrates later says “for the unexamined life is not worth living for men” (Apology, 38a),

Socrates believes every city and person has virtues within them, and it is the proper balance of the virtues that results in justice. The virtues of a city, Socrates mentions are, wisdom, courage, temperance and justice. He claims justice is the balance of all three virtues with everybody playing their proper role in society. The first virtue he examines is wisdom. Wisdom, Socrates say’s resides in the smallest class, the Rulers, because they posses the knowledge, “…which takes measures, not in behalf of anything in the city, but in behalf of the city as a whole…”(Republic, 428d). The next virtue Socrates examines is, courage which he defines as the knowledge of what to fear. Courage he explains lies with the auxiliaries because they must

In order to do this, he goes about Athens questioning those he believes to be wiser than him, including politicians, poets, and craftsmen. Upon this questioning, he discovers that even those perceived as the wisest actually know far less than one would expect. Even the craftsmen, who have much practical wisdom in their respective fields, see their success as merely a tribute to their vast knowledge of many subjects. This, Socrates claims, is not true wisdom. Human wisdom can be described as the acknowledgement and acceptance that one does not know everything, nor is one capable of knowing everything. This, however, does not mean that people should sit idly by, never pursuing wisdom, for it is still vital to the attainment of a good life, which should be the ultimate goal of mankind.

The characterisitics of the ideal guardian is summarized in those words by Socrates in the second book of the Republic : “[H]e who is to be a really good and noble guardian of the State will require to unite in himself philosophy and spirit and swiftness and strength. . .” Swiftness and strength is deemed necessary as the guardian is to be like a well-bred watchdog, who ought to be “quick to see, and swift to overtake the enemy when they see him, and strong too, if when they have caught him, they have to fight with him.” The requirement of ‘spirit’ is then derived from this, because if he is to fight well he ought to be brave, and Socrates finds that he is not likely to be brave who has not